\  S.'YYX  - 

M  v  se. . 


THE  PROBLEM  OF 
RELIGIOUS  JOURNALISM 

by 

WILLIAM  E.  GILROY 

Editor-in-Chief  of  the  Congregationalist 


Editorial  Council  of  the  Religious  Press 
105  East  22d  Street 
New  York 


* 


\  •• 


V»  :  '' 

‘  S  <  ‘ 

i  '  f 


Y 


This  address  was  delivered  by  the  Editor 
of  the  Congregationalist  before  the  Convoca¬ 
tion  of  the  Yale  Divinity  School  onr  the  22d 
of  April,  1925.  It  is  published  for  general 
distribution  by  the  Editorial  Council  of  the 
Religious  Press,  which  is  an  association  of  the 
editors  of  religious  publications,  organized 
under  the  auspices  of  the  Federal  Council  of 
the  Churches  of  Christ  in  America. 


The  Problem  of  Religious  Journalism 

William  E.  Gilroy 

Shortly  before  I  began  my  present  editorial  work, 
but  after  my  appointment  had  been  announced,  I  was 
asked  by  an  English  religious  newspaper  to  write  some¬ 
thing  on  religious  journalism.  I  was  about  to  reply 
that  I  knew  nothing  about  the  subject,  but  was  hop¬ 
ing  to  learn  something,  when  I  suddenly  remembered 
that  I  had  known  a  great  deal  about  child  training 
before  I  had  had  a  child  of  my  own.  I  concluded 
that  if  I  had  anything  to  say  on  the  subject  of  religious 
journalism  I  had  better  say  it  as  soon  as  possible, 
and,  deeply  venturing,  I  yielded  to  the  English 
editor's  request. 

It  is  not  in  that  spirit  that  I  have  accepted  the 
invitation  to  speak  here  upon  this  theme  to-day.  I 
come  not  so  much  in  the  spirit  of  an  adventurer  as 
of  one  in  some  measure  disillusioned,  and  in  some 
measure  frankly  puzzled,  to  present  some  problems 
of  a  perplexing  field  and  situation  where,  if  they  do 
not  find  solution,  they  may  at  least  find  the  light  of 
day.  Apart  from  my  personal  relation  to  the  theme, 
I  am  grateful  to  the  Yale  Convocation  for  having 
recognized  the  field  of  religious  journalism.  As  far 
as  I  am  aware  it  is  the  first  time  that  a  great  occasion 
has  lent  its  prestige  to  discussions  concerning  an 
activity  which,  if  its  existence  be  justified  at  all, 
ought  in  its  own  sphere  to  have  a  distinction  and 
importance  akin  to  that  given  to  religious  education, 
pulpit  and  pastoral  ministry,  and  other  matters  per¬ 
sistently  discussed  where  those  interested  in  religion 
and  the  Church  come  together  for  conference. 


I  should  be  presuming  greatly  if  upon  the  strength 
of  my  slender  experience  in  religious  journalism  I  pro¬ 
fessed  to  speak  with  dogmatism  or  constructive  in¬ 
sight.  I  am  well  aware  that  the  theme  is  one  upon 
which,  by  what  seems  to  most  editors  general  con¬ 
sent,  every  man  is  competent  to  speak,  whether  he 
knows  anything  about  it  or  not.  But  an  editor  has 
this  advantage,  he  knows  how  little  he  knows.  His 
only  conscious  superiority  over  his  advisers  and 
critics  lies  in  the  fact  that  he  discovers  very  quickly 
how  large,  varied  and  intricate  is  the  field,  how 
inadequate  his  knowledge  of  it,  and  how  fallible  his 
judgment.  The  problems  are  emphasized  while  the 
solutions  are  illusive.  So  I  have  come,  not  to  impart, 
but  to  seek,  wisdom.  My  sole  qualification  for  speak¬ 
ing  is  that,  in  three  years  of  rather  intense  experience 
at  what  may,  perhaps,  be  regarded  as  one  of  the 
crucial  centers  of  religious  journalism,  I  have  been 
compelled  to  see  with  the  fresh  vision  of  the  new¬ 
comer  and  in  bolder  relief  than  perhaps  they  appear 
to  eyes  longer  accustomed  to  the  daily  round,  the 
weaknesses,  the  difficulties,  the  dangers,  the  oppor¬ 
tunities,  the  manifold  problems — and  in  some  re¬ 
spects  the  joys  and  satisfactions — of  religious  jour¬ 
nalism.  I  speak  the  more  boldly  out  of  a  limited 
experience  because  I  find  that  at  almost  every  point 
the  judgments  and  confessions  of  the  most  seasoned 
editors  of  religious  papers  strongly  confirm  my  own 
impressions. 

A  few  weeks  ago  I  was  among  a  group  of  editors 
in  which  five  outstanding  religious  weeklies  were 
represented.  In  combined  circulation,  in  variety  of 
type  and  denominational  affiliation,  in  quality  and 
high-mindedness  of  editorial  purpose,  and  in  the 
comparative  intellectual  status  and  culture  of  their 
respective  constituencies,  no  group  could  have  been 

4 


found  anywhere  representing  higher  ideals  and 
achievement.  Four  of  these  papers  had  back  of 
them  a  century  of  continuous  service,  and  their  re¬ 
spective  constituencies  were  probably  never  larger 
numerically  during  all  that  period  than  they  are  at 
the  present  time.  Here  was  religious  journalism 
represented  in  its  best  and  most  hopeful  aspects. 

A  Real  Problem 

Yet  I  found  when  the  conversation  fell  upon  my 
address  here  to-day,  and  my  brother  editors  pro¬ 
ceeded  to  tell  me  what  to  say,  very  frankly  and  freely 
revealing  their  inmost  minds,  that  on  some  points 
there  was  almost  complete  unanimity.  Very  seriously 
and  unanimously  they  were  agreed  that  the  outlook 
for  religious  journalism  is  exceedingly  dark  unless 
the  Church  can  be  roused  to  see  the  need  of  grappling 
with  the  problem.  Some,  frankly,  were  disposed 
to  sing  the  swan  song  of  religious  journalism,  and  to 
regard  themselves  as  men  working  upon  shifting 
ground;  others  considered  present  work  and  oppor¬ 
tunities  worth  while  regardless  of  the  future;  others 
expressed  the  conviction  that,  even  if  the  situation 
became  worse,  journalism,  like  preaching,  was  an 
essential  concomitant  of  religion,  and  was  bound  to 
have  a  revival;  but  all  were  agreed  that  the  conditions 
under  which  religious  journalism  must  be  carried  on 
have  changed  as  irrevocably  as  the  conditions  at¬ 
tending  educational  and  other  activities  of  the  Church, 
and  that  if  journalism  is  to  continue  as  an  effective 
agency  in  the  service  of  the  Church  there  must  be  a 
revaluation  of  its  place  and  purpose  and  provision 
for  more  adequate  support,  and  possibly  a  different 
basis  of  support. 

Perhaps  it  is  as  well  to  meet  at  the  outset  the 
straight  challenge  that  is  implied  in  this  alternative. 


Is  journalism  a  necessary  function  of  the  religious 
life?  And,  if  so,  is  it  inherently  necessary  for  the 
Church  in  the  forms  in  which  it  has  been  chiefly 
known?  Is  the  old  type  of  religious  weekly  to  con¬ 
tinue?  Are  all  the  religious  weeklies  necessary? 
Ought  there  to  be,  and  is  it  possible  to  have,  some 
federation  and  unification  in  religious  journalism 
such  as  has  been  developing  in  church  life  generally? 
These  questions  are  germane  to  the  very  continuance 
of  religious  journalism  under  present  forms,  or  in 
any  form. 

Nor  can  the  answer  to  these  questions  be  too 
readily  assumed.  The  iconoclasm  that  is  at  work 
generally  is  present  in  discussion  upon  this  field.  I 
was  addressing  some  time  ago  a  group  of  ministers 
of  various  denominations,  and  had  been  asked  special¬ 
ly  to  speak  upon  the  subject  of  religious  journalism. 
I  spoke,  naturally,  out  of  my  own  experience,  and 
had  outlined  what  I  regarded  as  a  broad,  wholesome, 
Christian  policy  that  would  lift  so-called  “denomi¬ 
national”  journalism  out  of  any  narrow  and  sectarian 
level.  I  thought  I  had  indicated  the  value  of  such 
journalism  as  the  necessary  accompaniment  and 
organ  of  the  witness  of  every  branch  or  phase  of  the 
Christian  Church,  yet  in  the  discussion  that  followed 
the  first  speaker  very  seriously  raised  the  question 
whether  denominational  journalism  had  just  ground 
for  existence  at  all. 

To  that  I  think  the  reply  must  be  that  while 
denominations  exist  there  will  be  reason  for  denomi¬ 
national  organs.  If  these  organs  are  narrow  in  spirit 
and  sectional  and  sectarian  in  appeal,  the  fault  must 
lie  in  the  denominations  that  they  serve.  In  the  main 
it  will  be  found  that  a  denominational  organ  is  usually 
somewhat  in  advance  of  the  rank  and  file  of  the 
denomination.  But  there  is  a  further  reply  to  the 

6 


iconoclasm  that  proposes  the  abolition  of  denomi¬ 
national  journalism,  viz.,  that  if  such  reversal  of  the 
past  were  made,  the  least  denominational  organs 
would  disappear  while  the  most  intensely  denomina¬ 
tional  would  undoubtedly  continue.  Intense  propa- 
gandism  will  always  have  its  organ.  The  more  sec¬ 
tarian  and  proselytizing  the  group  the  more  certain 
will  be  its  possession  of  a  newspaper,  no  matter  at 
what  cost  and  sacrifice  it  must  be  maintained. 

A  Necessary  Function 

The  liberal  and  progressive  elements  in  the 
Churches  might  well  take  this  to  heart.  Judged  from 
the  standpoint  of  openness  of  mind  and  progressive 
outlook  it  is  not  the  worst,  but  the  best,  of  religious 
newspapers  that  are  in  danger  from  the  spirit  of 
apathy  and  iconoclasm.  Men  who  have  themselves 
attained  to  liberty  of  thought  and  life  are  apt  to 
judge  a  religious  newspaper  by  its  necessity  or  value 
for  themselves.  Its  editorials  and  contributed  ar¬ 
ticles  are  apt  to  be  upon  a  plane  above  which  they  have 
themselves  risen.  Its  weekly  visits  are  apt  to  find 
them  indifferent  or  frankly  bored.  And  on  that 
account  they  fail  to  realize  how  necessary  is  a  paper 
of  home-appealing  type,  which  interprets,  as  far  as 
may  be  possible,  the  movements  of  thought  and  life 
in  popular  language  and  in  popular  ways.  The 
editor  of  such  a  paper  may  count  it  an  achievement 
if  he  can  perform  this  task  of  popular  appeal  and 
popular  interpretation  of  truth  without  sacrificing 
essential  values.  He  may  feel  gratified  if  he  wins 
the  confidence  of  thoughtful  critics,  their  sensing  of 
his  task,  and  their  approval  of  the  way  in  which  he  is 
doing  it;  but  if  he  finds  that  these  same  thoughtful 
critics  are  more  directly  interested  in  the  matter  that 
he  is  publishing  than  in  its  value  for  those  who  lack 

7 


their  academic  training  and  capacity  for  thinking 
problems  through,  he  may  well  question  whether 
he  is  accomplishing  the  thing  that  his  paper  is  chiefly 
designed  to  do.  In  much  current  criticism  of  re¬ 
ligious  newspapers  there  is  an  almost  total  lack  of 
study  of  the  conditions  and  needs  of  the  constituency 
to  which  the  paper  should  minister.  The  necessity 
and  worth  of  a  religious  newspaper’s  service  are  to  be 
determined  not  by  its  essential  value  for  the  scholar 
and  critic,  but  by  the  quality  and  soundness  of  its 
interpretation  of  the  movements  of  religious  thought 
and  life  for  the  general  constituency. 

An  editor,  it  is  true,  should  never  be  permitted 
to  plead  any  such  circumstances  in  mitigation  of 
careless,  slovenly  or  dishonest  work.  There  are 
certain  qualities  that  should  as  clearly  and  pre¬ 
dominantly  characterize  an  organ  that  appeals  to 
the  most  humble  readers  as  a  review  designed  for  the 
most  scholarly  and  critical.  Sincerity  and  straight¬ 
forwardness  are  essential.  Clearness  and  vigor  of 
style  are  as  valuable  in  the  newspaper  as  in  the 
review.  Appeal  to  prejudice,  or  a  mere  supplying 
of  “what  the  readers  want,”  is  as  much  to  be  con¬ 
demned  in  one  case  as  in  the  other.  Nothing  is  more 
essential  in  the  field  of  popular  religious  journalism 
to-day  than  that  there  be  that  fine  conscientiousness, 
that  honesty  in  dealing  with  truth,  which  pervades 
the  highest  spheres  of  academic  thought  and  discus¬ 
sion.  Journalism’s  high  task  of  the  popularizing  of 
religious  truth  is  not  found  in  the  bringing  of  truth  to 
the  level  of  the  people,  but  in  bringing  the  people  to 
the  level  of  truth,  or  to  its  vision  as  something  worthy 
of  attainment. 

To  effect  such  contacts  with  and  understandings 
of  truth  is  no  small  task.  I  venture,  however,  to 
claim  that  the  religious  weekly  has  been  the  greatest 

8 


power  in  the  fulfilment  of  that  task  in  the  past.  And 
I  venture  further  to  inquire  how  that  task  is  going 
to  be  performed  in  the  future  if  enlightened,  progres¬ 
sive  religious  journalism  is  allowed  to  lapse,  or  is  in¬ 
adequately  supported.  If  the  Churches  were  alive 
to  the  problem  they  would  see  the  need  of  strengthen¬ 
ing  and  extending  the  forces  of  religious  journalism 
in  manifold  ways.  Here  lies  the  way  to  the  building 
of  broader  and  better  foundations. 

It  may  be  said  that  I  am  minimizing  the  field 
and  at  the  same  time  idealizing  the  service  of  the  re¬ 
ligious  weekly.  I  do  not  call  this  a  minimizing  of 
the  field.  There  is  only  one  higher  field  than  that  of 
popularizing  truth,  and  that  is  its  discovery.  If  I  seem 
to  be  idealizing  what  the  religious  weekly  has  done, 
what  it  is  doing,  and  what  it  is  capable  of  doing,  let 
me  appeal  to  existing  religious  journalism.  It  is  true 
that  in  the  aggregate  it  presents  a  disappointing  mass, 
narrow,  sectarian  stuff,  lacking  alike  in  grace  of  man¬ 
ner  and  in  magnanimity  of  soul.  But  out  of  that  mass 
there  stand  distinctive  types  of  religious  newspapers 
that  are  all  the  more  notable  against  a  dark  background. 

An  Analysis  of  Religious  Journalism* 

Let  me  analyze  these  journalistic  forces  in  Amer¬ 
ican  religion: 

1.  At  the  lowest  scale  are  the  merely  sectarian 
or  denominational  organs— news  sheets  with  a  very 
circumscribed  outlook,  or  organs  of  sheer  sectarian 
propaganda. 

♦The  classification  here  given  is  in  no  sense  intended  to 
be  complete.  The  names  of  the  publications  mentioned  are 
given  only  as  concrete  illustrations.  The  references  to  the 
Congregationalist  are  more  frequent  than  to  other  publications 
only  because  the  author  is  more  familiar  with  the  details  con¬ 
nected  with  this  publication. 


9 


2.  At  the  opposite  extreme  are  papers  of  a  non- 
or  inter-denominational  character,  such  as  the  Christian 
Herald,  or  the  Christian  Century ,  the  latter  published 
by  the  Disciples  Publishing  Company,  but  mani¬ 
festly  seeking  to  emphasize  its  essential  non-denomi- 
nationalism. 

3.  In  a  third  group  are  papers  of  a  general  or  of  a 
denominational  character,  that  are  designed  primarily 
to  serve  certain  interests  or  causes.  The  Christian 
Work,  for  instance,  is  a  general  religious  weekly,  devoted 
especially  to  the  cause  of  world  peace;  and  the  Living 
Church,  nominally  Episcopalian,  is  devoted  to  the  ad¬ 
vocacy  of  specialized  high  church  conceptions. 

4.  And  finally,  in  a  fourth  group  are  certain 
weeklies  that  can  be  called  “denominational”  only  in 
a  very  broad  sense.  They  are  affiliated  with,  or  ap¬ 
peal  to,  certain  groups  of  churches,  but  they  represent 
a  general  outlook  on  religious  life,  and  a  very  specific 

.  emphasis  upon  religious  thought.  They  represent 
the  widest  interest  in  the  whole  field  of  religion 
though  their  survey  may  be  from  a  particular  view¬ 
point.  Among  such  papers  are  the  Churchman,  the 
Continent,  the  U niver salist  Leader ,  the  Christian  Regis¬ 
ter,  Zion’s  Herald,  the  Congregationalist,  and  others 
of  super-denominational  spirit  and  interest. 

Ideals  Partially  Realized 

If  any  man  doubts  the  value,  the  high-minded¬ 
ness,  the  efficacy,  of  religious  journalism  to-day,  I 
challenge  him  to  take  a  dozen  of  these  outstanding 
papers  of  various  affiliations  and  outlooks,  read  them 
carefully  for  a  dozen  consecutive  weeks,  and  to  re¬ 
tain  his  doubts.  On  the  contrary,  I  believe  that 
persistent  contact  with  the  outstanding  religious,, 
weeklies  will  convince  the  impartial  critic  of  the  place, 
need,  and  possibly  the  power  of  religious  journalism. 

10 


He  may  find  defects  of  interest,  policy  and  judgment, 
but  I  think  he  will  be  impressed  with  the  profound 
sincerity  of  editorial  purpose  and  the  intense  personal 
honesty  with  which  the  editors  of  these  leading  or¬ 
gans  are  doing  their  work. 

My  own  contacts  in  the  editorial  field  have 
been  limited  to  the  past  three  years.  Some  fellow 
editors  I  know  chiefly  through  their  editorial  columns, 
others  I  know  through  occasional  contacts,  but  a 
fair  number  I  have  come  to  know  through  intimate 
personal  contacts  in  which  a  sense  of  common  prob¬ 
lems  has  established  deep  mutual  sympathies  and  self¬ 
revelations.  My  own  editorial  outlook  differs  ma¬ 
terially  from  that  of  some  of  my  fellows.  We  have 
crossed  swords  editorially  and  in  personal  contacts. 
With  one  or  two  I  seldom  meet  when  we  get  by  with¬ 
out  frank  but  friendly  controversy.  I  may  consider 
my  brother  editor  mistaken,  and  he  may  think  the 
same  of  me.  But  this  conviction  has  been  born  out 
of  these  contacts:  I  can  not  conceive  of  any  one  of 
these  editors,  whom  I  have  come  to  know,  consciously 
misrepresenting  either  a  fact  or  a  situation,  no  matter 
how  much  it  might  be  to  his  advantage  to  do  so. 

That  means  a  great  deal  in  an  age  when  journal¬ 
ism  in  general  is  cursed  with  much  deliberate  mis¬ 
representation  and  propaganda;  when  news  columns 
are  vitiated  by  partisan  and  reactionary  bias,  radical 
or  conservative,  and  editorial  columns  are  dominated 
by  advertising  and  business  interests.  I  do  not  refer 
to  these  things  to  make  Pharisaic  parade  of  the  vir¬ 
tues  of  religious  editors.  It  may  well  be  asked,  Why 
should  not  the  editor  of  a  religious  paper  be  truthful 
and  honest?  That  is  his  simple  duty.  He  may  well 
call  himself  an  unprofitable  servant  having  done 
only  that  that  it  was  his  duty  to  do.  I  am  not  con¬ 
cerned  about  praise  or  credit  for  the  editor,  but  I  am 

11 


deeply  concerned  about  the  significance  of  the  fact 
of  the  general  integrity  of  religious  journalism. 

There  can  not  be  too  strong  emphasis  upon  the 
place  of  the  religious  newspaper  in  the  general  field  of 
journalism.  It  is  the  last  stand  in  editorial  honesty 
and  good  journalism — the  last  barrier  of  defense 
against  the  forces  that  are  all  too  willing  to  mislead 

and  corrupt  public  opinion. 

I  do  not  say  that  it  is  the  only  stand.  One  recog¬ 
nizes  gladly  the  efforts  in  various  quarters  to  main¬ 
tain  high-mindedness  in  the  secular  press.  Even  m 
a  field  largely  dominated  by  partisan  and  mercenary, 
if  not  by  sordid  and  corrupt,  interests,  all  have  not 
by  any  means  bowed  the  knee  to  Baal.  But  only 
where  regard  for  wholesome  influences  and  for  the 
interests  of  truth  constitutes  a  veritable  religion  can 
there  be  a  sound  basis  for  journalism,  and  in  this 
sense  its  last  stand  is  in  a  sound  and  enlightened  re¬ 
ligious  press. 

The  Guarantee  of  Disinterestedness 

I  am  not  speaking  at  random.  Not  long  ago  a 
man  of  pre-eminence  in  the  field  of  secular  journalism 
was  addressing  a  group  of  people  interested  in  re¬ 
ligious  publications.  He  pleaded  with  them  at  all 
costs  to  maintain  a  high  type  of  religious  newspaper, 
for,  speaking  from  long  and  intimate  experience,  he 
asserted  that  this  was  the  only  ultimate  guarantee 
of  a  disinterested  press. 

The  economist  is  familiar  with  Gresham  s  Law, 
which,  I  think,  is  to  the  effect  that  bad  money  will 
drive  out  good  money.  If  everybody  will  accept  a 
debased  or  mutilated  coinage  nobody  will  use  good 
money.  If  paper  money  is  accepted  everywhere,  who 
will  pay  in  gold?  Gresham  s  Law  operates  with 
deadly  certainty  in  the  financial  world,  and  govern- 

12 


merits  and  economists  have  rightly  bent  all  their 
energies  to  the  maintenance  of  standards.  There  is  a 
sort  of  Gresham's  Law  in  journalism,  constantly  and 
everywhere  operative.  We  are  ever  in  danger  from 
appeals  along  the  line  of  least  resistance.  Bad  jour¬ 
nals  will  drive  out  good  journals  unless  there  is  the 
most  persistent  and  painstaking  care  to  maintain 
high  standards,  and  to  develop  the  demand  of  higher 
interests  and  of  good  taste.  This  matter  can  not  be 
neglected  or  left  to  chance. 

Yet  the  Churches,  constantly  deploring  the  con¬ 
dition  of  the  press,  constantly  demanding  better 
daily  newspapers,  have  been  content  to  assume  a  lax 
and  ineffective  attitude  toward  the  one  distinctive 
contribution  that  they  might  make  toward  the  up¬ 
building  of  a  better  journalism.  Let  the  Churches 
show  the  way  by  adequately  supporting  a  journalism 
that  shall  be  not  only  honest  and  truthful,  but  well 
endowed  and  equipped  to  render  the  widest  service 
possible.  There  is  not  a  religious  editor  in  America 
to-day  who  is  not. carrying  on  his  work  without  suf¬ 
ficient  official  backing,  without  adequate  popular 
support,  without  adequate  staff  and  equipment. 
The  average  editor  is  doing  his  best,  but  he  sees 
visions  and  possibilities  of  service  that  presence  of 
handicaps  and  absence  of  resources  prevent  his  real¬ 
izing. 

I  do  not  say  these  things  in  pessimism,  or  by  way 
of  complaint.  I  understand  now  why  it  was  that, 
early  in  my  editorial  career,  when  I  visited  an  editor 
well-seasoned  through  long  experience,  I  found  him 
in  a  somewhat  cynical,  though  stubbornly  undis¬ 
couraged,  mood.  He  complained  that  many  in  the 
denominations  regarded  the  religious  organ  as  a  sort 
of  fifth  wheel  on  the  coach,  something  they  would 
like  to  get  rid  of  but  couldn't  well  do  without.  Every 


editor  gets  in  that  mood  at  times,  but  every  editor 
has  to  acknowledge  with  gratitude  the  loyalty  of 
many  constituents,  and  more  words  of  encourage¬ 
ment  and  commendation  than  he  deserves.  I  empha¬ 
size  these  basal  facts  and  circumstances  only  be¬ 
cause  my  outlook  is  optimistic.  I  have  profound 
faith  in  the  cause  of  religious  journalism,  and  I  be¬ 
lieve  there  is  a  great  future  in  store  if  church  people 
generally  can  be  aroused  to  see  the  situation  in  the 
right  light.  But  it  is  useless  to  talk  of  better  journal¬ 
ism  in  the  general  field  of  newspaperdom  while  the 
Church  neglects,  or  holds  lightly,  its  own  opportunity 
and  task. 


Intelligent  Interest  in  Religion 

But  there  is  a  further  peculiar  need  for  the  main¬ 
tenance  of  a  high  type  of  religious  journalism  in  the 
presence  of  the  general  field.  Every  religious  editor 
rejoices  in  the  increasing  interest  of  the  daily  press 
in  the  activities  of  the  churches.  Religion  is  more  a 
matter  of  news  and  of  editorial  interest  than  ever 
before — so  much  so  that  the  religious  section  of  cer¬ 
tain  great  dailies  might  easily  be  regarded  as  a  sub¬ 
stitute  for  the  older  type  of  religious  weekly.  One 
thinks  with  gratitude  of  such  papers  as  the  Brooklyn 
Eagle,  on  Mondays,  and  the  Boston  Transcript  on  Sat¬ 
urdays.  The  far-sighted  religious  editor  has  no  re¬ 
sentment  of  this  growing  competition,  especially 
when  the  religious  work  of  the  daily  newspaper  is 
done  with  intelligence  and  skill.  What  does  alarm 
him,  however,  is  the  growing  discussion  in  the  public 
press  of  religious  activities  and  of  religious  thought 
and  movements,  not  only  without  discrimination  or 
sense  of  values,  but  without  the  slightest  evidence 
of  knowledge  of  the  facts  and  subjects  discussed,  or 
apparent  qualification  for  the  task.  The  daily  paper 

14 


is  not  entirely  to  blame  for  this.  Certain  pulpit 
utterances  and  church  happenings  have  a  news 
value  regardless  of  their  spiritual  significance.  The 
most  discordant  things  are  equally  food  for  the  news 
hopper.  The  more  sensational  and  extravagant  the 
incident  the  better  its  news  value.  Instances  of  this 
dealing  with  religious  and  sacred  things  in  the  most 
off-hand,  if  not  the  most  irreligious  and  inwardly 
contemptuous,  way  could  be  multiplied  without  num¬ 
ber. 

Can  the  Church  leave  the  field  of  religious 
journalism  to  the  secular  press  at  a  time  when  dis¬ 
criminating  judgment  was  never  more  needed  in 
discussion  of  religious  affairs? 

Thus  far  I  have  only  vaguely  suggested  the  dif¬ 
ficulties  and  needs  that  confront  the  worker  in  the 
field  of  religious  journalism.  Let  me  be  more  specific 
in  defining  these  difficulties  and  their  causes. 

The  Financial  Problem 

Let  me  begin  with  the  material  basis  and  cite  by 
reference  to  the  paper  that  I  know  best  an  illustration 
that  applies  to  the  whole  field.  Sixty  years  ago  the 
subscription  price  of  the  Congregationalist  was  exactly 
the  same  as  it  is  to-day.  The  costs  of  production  have 
increased  in  some  respects  probably  ten-fold.  The 
paper  has  developed  from  a  homogeneous  New  Eng¬ 
land  paper  to  one  of  national  scope  with  a  wide  staff 
of  correspondents,  and  with  interests  as  varied  and 
ramified  as  the  wider  growth  of  churches  and  the  de¬ 
velopments  of  church  life  and  work'  have  rendered 
necessary.  The  growth  of  the  work  has  been  carried 
on  through  the  years  with  a  diminishing  editorial 
and  office  staff,  yet,  in  spite  of  rigid  economies,  and 
a  subscription  list  that  has  averaged  higher  in  recent 
years  than  ever  before,  the  need  of  subsidy  has  been 

15 


unavoidable.  It  is  hard  to  see  how  this  need  could 
well  be  avoided,  with  costs  constantly  increasing  while 
the  subscription  price  has  remained  the  same.  More¬ 
over,  this  price  has  remained  the  same  because  sixty 
years  ago  it  was  relatively  exceedingly  high,  constitut¬ 
ing  a  symbol  of  the  value  then  attached  to  religious 
journalism  and  an  evidence  of  the  sacrifices  people 
of  a  former  generation  were  willing  to  pay  for  it.  I  cite 
the  case  of  the  Congregationalist  because  it  is  repre¬ 
sentative  of  the  situation  everywhere.  My  investiga¬ 
tions  have  shown  that,  except  in  one  or  two  instances 
where  the  circumstances  are  exceptional,  other  reli¬ 
gious  newspapers  need  special  support  or  subsidizing 
upon  the  same  scale  as  the  Congregationalist  in  pro¬ 
portion  to  the  scope  and  quality  of  the  work  they  are 
doing. 

I  can  not  see  how  subsidies  are  to  be  avoided  if 
religious  journalism  is  to  have  a  future,  and  I  look  for¬ 
ward  to  a  time  when  interest  in  this  problem  and  a 
perception  of  the  distinctive  opportunity  will  have 
the  effect  of  creating  endowments  for  religious  news¬ 
papers  similar  to  those  that  have  been  accorded  edu¬ 
cational  institutions.  Why  not?  Religious  journalism 
is  a  necessary  part  of  religious  education,  and  educa¬ 
tional  institutions  were  once,  like  religious  journals, 
able  to  exist  upon  their  income.  The  situation  that 
confronts  religious  journalism  is  very  similar  to  that 
which  has  confronted  educational  institutions.  The 
need  has  been  recognized,  though  inadequately,  in 
the  latter  case;  it  remains  hardly  recognized  at  all 
in  the  former  case. 

I  have  found  among  other  editors  wide  agreement 
with  the  conclusions  which  I  am  stating. 

Two  partial  solutions  of  the  financial  problem 
of  religious  journalism  are  often  suggested.  The  first 
is  advertising.  This  constitutes  at  present  for  most 


papers  a  substantial  source  of  income,  but  it  is  doubt¬ 
ful  whether  the  income  can  be  largely  increased.  From 
many  forms  of  advertising  that  have  proved  most 
lucrative  for  the  secular  press  the  religious  press  is 
barred.  Not  only  are  certain  advertisements  ruled 
out  upon  ethical  grounds,  but  a  wider  assortment,, 
such  as  patent  medicine  ads.,  the  glowing-offer  ad., 
etc.,  are  recognizedly  undesirable.  The  advertising 
field  is,  always  will  be,  and  ought  to  be,  limited.  The 
denomination  which  would  have  courage  to  com¬ 
mandeer  the  entire  space  in  its  official  organ,  for  its 
own  purposes,  without  seeking  general  advertising, 
would  probably  find  the  venture  ultimately  profit¬ 
able  even  if  it  involved  an  apparently  heavy  outlay 
without  direct  return.  Under  present  conditions  I 
think  it  may  be  said  that  most  religious  newspapers 
have  exploited  the  advertising  field  to  the  utmost, 
and  that  further  large  sources  of  income  in  that 
direction  are  unlikely  under  any  circumstances,  and 
certainly  not  without  greatly  increased  circulation. 

Can  There  Be  Consolidation? 

The  other  partial  solution  of  the  financial  prob¬ 
lem  lies  in  the  direction  of  merger  and  consolidation. 
Within  the  various  denominations  this  has  been  dis¬ 
cussed,  and  greater  unification  of  denominational 
publicity  is  being  seriously  considered.  Movements 
for  union  and  comity  between  the  denominations 
have  not  yet  in  any  notable  degree  touched  the  field 
of  religious  journalism.  Possibly  a  drawing  together 
of  religious  publications  must  follow  rather  than  pre¬ 
cede  the  merging  of  the  interests  that  they  represent. 
But  some  merger  ought  to  be  possible,  especially  as 
denominationalism  becomes  less  and  less  sectarian 
and  Christians  think  of  their  denomination  not  as  an 
end  in  itself,  but  as  a  means  to  an  end;  not  as  a  goal,. 

17 


but  as  a  gateway  to  the  larger  interests  of  the  King¬ 
dom. 

- '  I  have  no  axe  to  grind, and  I  trust  I  shall  not 
give  offense  if  I  have  the  temerity  to  suggest  possible 
lines  of  drawing  together.  What  would  happen  if 
through  some  error  subscription  lists  got  mixed  for  a 
few  weeks?  By  a  strange  mistake  a  few  weeks  ago, 
from  the  plant  where  both  papers  are  printed,  several 
hundred  Congregationalists  were  sent  out  on  the  sub¬ 
scription  list  of  Zion's  Herald.  Editor  Hartman  has 
yet  to  report  any  serious  protest  among  his  sub¬ 
scribers.  I  am  under  the  impression  that  hundreds 
of  Congregationalist  readers  would  welcome  an  error 
that  afforded  a  week’s  reading  of  Zion’s  Herald. 
There  must  be  considerable  similarity  between  the 
constituencies  reached  by  such  papers  as  the  Con¬ 
tinent  and  the  Congregationalist ,  while  the  Universalist 
Leader,  if  the  label  Universalist  were  forgotten,  would 
probably  be  acceptable  to  subscribers  of  both  the 
above  constituencies.  At  least  it  can  be  said  that  the 
fields  and  interests  of  religious  newspapers  overlap 
as  never  before.  Half  a  century  may  make  possible 
developments  not  yet  foreseen,  or  immediately  prac¬ 
ticable. 

One  thing  does  seem  possible  that  I  hope  I  may 
have  some  part  in  promoting.  That  is  a  larger  com¬ 
ity  and  co-operation  between  religious  newspapers 
as  now  existing.  I  do  not  see  why  editors  should 
not  exchange  editorials  as  ministers  of  different  de¬ 
nominations  exchange  pulpits.  Though  I  believe  it 
has  never  been  done,  I  do  not  see  why  clubbing  rates 
should  not  be  promoted  between  supposedly  rival 
organs.  In  reality  we  are  not  rivals,  but  contem¬ 
poraries  and  co-operators  in  a  Christian  enterprise. 
Even  in  our  differences  and  seeming  oppositions  it  is 
nearer  the  truth  to  recognize  that  we  represent  dif- 

18 


ferent  angles  and  poles  of  the  world  of  religious 
thought. 

It  would  be  profoundly  valuable  for  readers  of 
the  Congregationalist  to  see  the  Churchman,  and  vice 
versa,  though  the  respective  editors  might  get  surpris¬ 
ing  and  stimulating  reactions.  What  is  true  of  these 
two  papers  is  true  all  along  the  line. 

Spiritual  Loyalty  a  Supporting  Factor 

Meanwhile  there  is  a  further  type  of  support 
that  is  badly  needed,  and  that  might,  if  forthcoming, 
be  profoundly  influential  in  creating  everywhere  the 
effective  demand  for  a  new  order  of  secular  journalism; 
in  fact,  I  believe  that  it  lies  at  the  very  foundation 
of  the  upbuilding  of  an  honest,  courageous,  impartial, 
high-minded  public  press.  This  type  of  support  for 
want  of  a  better  term  I  may  describe  as  spiritual 
loyalty,  and  if  it  is  to  develop  into  a  power  and  an 
influence  in  the  general  field  it  must  probably  be  pri¬ 
marily  developed  within  the  great  constituency  served 
by  the  religious  press. 

If  people  want  honest  journalism  they  must  be 
prepared  to  give  allegiance  to  honest  journalists  in 
fair  weather  and  in  foul.  The  type  of  intense  en¬ 
thusiast  who  is  ready  to  discontinue  his  subscription 
the  first  time  an  editor  expresses  convictions  opposite 
to  his  own  is  shifting  sand  upon  which  to  build  a  sound 
journalistic  constituency— almost  as  much  so  as  the 
man  of  low  tastes  and  ideals.  No  honest  editor  can 
always  be  in  agreement  with  his  readers,  no  matter 
how  conscientious  the  latter  may  be,  for  readers  them¬ 
selves  are  not  in  agreement. 

No  editor,  of  course,  has  a  right  to  expect  support 
from  those  by  whom  his  policies  and  opinions  in  their 
total  import  and  general  spirit  are  not  approved.  But 
where  in  general  temper  and  spirit  a  paper  commends 

19 


itself  to  its  readers  there  is  large  need  of  the  exercise 
on  the  part  of  the  latter  of  a  tolerant  and  open- 
minded  spirit  in  minor  matters,  and  in  relation  to 
major  matters  where  wide  differences  of  judgment 
are  only  to  be  expected.  Though  an  editor  has  no 
claim  to  the  loyalty  of  his  readers  whether  he  be  right 
or  wrong,  he  has  some  claim  to  such  loyalty  in  his 
purpose  to  be  right,  even  when  his  readers  may  believe 
that  he  has,  temporarily  at  least,  failed  to  attain  his 
purpose. 

My  observation  in  a  constituency  not  illiberal 
or  intolerant,  backed  by  the  revelations  of  other 
editors,  has  convinced  me  that  the  securing  of  the 
right  temper  and  attitude  on  the  part  of  readers 
and  subscribers  lies  near  the  root  of  the  problem  of 
good  journalism.  Castigating  the  editor  and  with¬ 
drawal  of  support  are  not  the  best  ways  of  encourag¬ 
ing  impartial  and  outspoken  journalism.  If  there  be 
no  confidence  in  an  editor,  if  he  be  unworthy  of  sup¬ 
port,  of  course  the  whole  circumstance  is  altered;, 
there  is  nothing  to  say.  But  the  greatest  present  need 
both  for  journalism  and  for  the  Church  is  the  up¬ 
building  of  a  constituency  that  desires  fair  discussion 
from  all  points  of  view,  a  constituency  that  desires  to 
know  the  facts  no  matter  what  their  import  or  how  up¬ 
setting  their  effect,  and  a  constituency  that  perceives 
that  no  large  issue  can  be  settled  in  small  ways — a  con¬ 
stituency  that  sees,  in  short,  that  opinions  and  con¬ 
victions,  no  matter  how  conscientious,  are,  after  all, 
only  bigotries  and  prejudices  where  they  can  not  stand 
exposure  to  the  light  of  day,  or  maintain  themselves 
in  the  larger  environment  of  other  perceptions  and 
conclusions.  In  a  sense  it  is  one  of  the  chief  tasks  of 
religious  journalism  to  create  and  establish  this 
constituency  upon  which  its  own  life  and  effectiveness 
depend,  and  in  so  far  as  it  accomplishes  this  task 

20 


religious  journalism  performs  a  high  service  for  every 
sphere  of  life.  In  social  and  political  outlook,  as  well 
as  in  distinctively  religious  things,  the  world  is  waiting 
for  the  adequate  development  and  expression  of  truth¬ 
seeking  that  is  gracious  and  magnanimous,  touched 
with  an  inner  patience  and  kindliness,  and  character¬ 
ized  by  at  least  some  sense  of  dominating  loyalties. 

Study  Must  Precede  Criticisms  and  Proposals 

In  this  survey  I  have  touched  only  upon  the  fringes 
of  a  great  subject.  I  have  chosen  to  deal  with  ac¬ 
tual  situations  and  existing  problems  and  difficulties 
rather  than  to  engage  in  speculation  concerning  the 
future.  The  whole  field  is  rife  to-day  with  snap  judg¬ 
ments  and  speculative  proposals.  All  manner  of 
suggestions  are  made  for  the  solving  of  the  problems 
of  religious  journalism  where  the  factors  involved  in 
these  problems  have  not  been  either  appreciated  or 
studied.  I  am  convinced  that  an  accurate  and  care¬ 
ful  study  of  present  conditions  and  situations  must 
precede  any  vital  development  or  improvement. 

I  have  not  found  in  the  world  of  religious  journal¬ 
ism  any  spirit  of  stubborn  self-complacency.  Nowhere 
in  religious  leadership  to-day  will  there  be  found  a 
group  of  men  less  satisfied  with  their  own  efforts, 
more  anxious  for  light,  and  more  ready  to  adapt  them¬ 
selves  to  better  ways  and  methods,  than  are  the  men 
in  the  outstanding  religious  editorial  offices  in  America. 
But  they  crave  a  sympathy  that  will  perceive  their 
tasks  and  problems  from  the  center  rather  than  from 
the  circumference.  They  know  that  their  tasks  of 
mediation  and  interpretation  in  relation  to  the  issues 
of  truth  and  progress  are  by  no  means  accomplished. 
They  know  the  conditions  and  needs  of  their  constit¬ 
uencies  with  a  range  and  intimacy  in  which  they  are 
not  easily  revealed  to  other  eyes.  The  average  edi- 

21 


tor’s  mail-bag  is  in  itself  a  revelation,  and  much  of 
what  it  contains  would  be  almost  incredible  to  some 

people  who  think  they  "know  the  Church.” 

I  have  confined  my  discussion  to  the  religious 
weekly,  because  this  defines  the  limits  of  my  own 
experience,  and  also  because  it  is  here  that  the  prob¬ 
lems  of  religious  journalism  converge.  The  editor  of 
the  religious  weekly  knows  the  pulse  and  temperature 
of  the  Church  as  few  others  can.  He  may  not  be 
right  in  his  diagnosis  of  condition  and  need,  but  his 
ministry  is  necessarily  based  upon  a  wide  range  of 
facts  and  observations.  He  does  not  claim  for  him¬ 
self  immunity  from  criticism  or  any  place  of  special 
privilege.  The  better  and  more  faithfully  he  does 
his  work  the  more  directly  and  constantly  he  is  in¬ 
viting  criticism  with  every  weekly  issue.  His  spirit 
is  that  of  Henry  Havelock,  who  in  a  time  of  crisis 
and  peril  used  to  say  to  his  son,  "Let  us  ride  forth 
like  gentlemen  to  be  shot  at.”  He  does  not  care 
how  persistently  and  relentlessly  men  may  criticise 
the  way  in  which  he  is  performing  his  task.  He  may 
sense  the  unfairness  of  much  of  the  criticism,  but  he 
knows  that  honest  and  intelligent  criticism,  and 
counsel  from  many  sources,  must  be  the  basis  of 
improvement  in  his  own  work.  What  he  does  long 
for,  however,  is  that  his  task  itself  may  be  appre¬ 
ciated  and  valued  at  its  full  worth,  that  its  condi¬ 
tions  and  limitations,  its  goal  and  purpose,  as  well  as 
its  possibilities,  should  be  rightly  perceived. 

Nor  does  he  expect  that  in  the  general  recon¬ 
struction  of  the  Church  its  journalistic  enterprises 
will  be  free  from  transformation  and  readjustment. 
All  he  hopes  is  that  the  values  that  have  been  built 
up  will  be  in  some  way  preserved,  and  that  the  heri¬ 
tage  that  has  come  to  us  in  this  field  as  in  others  will 
not  be  neglected  or  lightly  passed  by.  ;  ■  • 

22 


A  Personal  Outlook  r 

r  In  dealing  with  the  task  of  religious  journalism' 
I  have  suggested  somewhat  generally  that'  it  is  pri¬ 
marily  that  of  the  popularization  of  truth  in  its 
ancient  essence  and  in  its  new  forms,  and  the  inter¬ 
pretation  of  the  moods  and  movements  of  the  re¬ 
ligious  life.  Possibly,  in  closing,  I  may  venture  to 
define  this  task  more  specifically  as  it  appeals  to  me. 
Every  editor  must  find  his  own  medium  and  his  own 
emphasis,  and  here  I  can  not  speak  for  others.  But 
I  find  my  own  task  largely  determined  by  my  con¬ 
sciousness  of  it  as  a  trust  exercised  in  relation  to, 
and  in  behalf  of,  a  great  free  fellowship  of  Churches/ 
In  so  far  as  it  is  personal  it  is  dominated  in  my  thought 
by  the  strong  conviction  that  we  are  to-day  on  the 
eve  of  a  great  religious  awakening,  a  new  heroic  epoch 
that  may  mark  a  stage  of  development  and  progress 
comparable  to  the  age  of  the  Reformation  or  other 
eras  which  we  have  assumed  to  be  epochs  of  advance. 
Were  there  time,  and  were  this  my  particular  theme, 
I  think  that  I  could  justify  this  faith.  At  any  rate 
it  has  involved  an  emphasis  upon  the  responsibility, 
and  possible  leadership,  in  relation  to  this  new  day 
of  the  fellowship  of  Churches  that  it  is  my  privilege 
to  serve.  It  has  seemed  to  me  necessary  to  em¬ 
phasize  constantly  the  freedom  and  reality  in  the 
religious  life  that  have  been  the  deepest  character¬ 
istics  of  every  heroic  epoch.  In  doing  this  it  has 
seemed  equally  necessary  to  avoid  all  militant  and 
divisive  counsels  and  to  promote  everywhere  those 
courtesies  and  contacts  that  may  lead  among  Chris¬ 
tians  to-day  to  a  better  mutual  understanding  of 
one  another,  an  appreciation  of  similarities  and  dif¬ 
ferences,  and  a  possible  realignment  or  co-operation 
in  building  for  the  new  day.  If  conflicts  and  contro¬ 
versies  are  not  to  be  avoided,  those  who  name  the 

23 


name  of  Christ  ought  at  least  to  know  one  another 
and  understand  what  they  are  fighting  about.  The 
aim  of  Christian  controversy,  it  has  seemed  to  me, 
ought  to  be  to  promote  mutual  knowledge  and  a  larger 
viewpoint,  rather  than  to  achieve  the  triumph  of 
sectional  opinion.  To  this  end  to  speak  boldly  and 
honestly  and  to  encourage  bold  and  honest  speaking,, 
in  the  spirit  of  love  and  courtesy,  has  seemed  the 
deepest  service  that  journalism  can  render  truth. 

This  is  the  spirit  of  the  task.  For  me  its  end 
and  purpose  have  been  defined  in  the  consciousness, 
of  the  need  of  bringing  the  whole  movement  of  the 
Church  into  consecration  to  Christ’s  mission  of  re¬ 
demption.  It  has  been  my  profound  hope  that 
through  the  medium  of  journalism  some  service 
might  be  rendered  in  developing  within  the  Churches 
of  free  and  liberal  spirit  an  evangel  and  an  evangelism 
that  might  be  expressive  of  their  own  life  and  ideals,, 
an  evangelism  that  should  be  marked  by  the  sim¬ 
plicity,  clarity  and  compassion  of  the  gospel  pro¬ 
claimed  by  Jesus  in  his  life  and  death.  I  have  longed 
to  see  evangelism  coming  to  expression,  not  as  an 
emotional  mood,  nor  as  a  side  issue  or  concern  of 
conservative  theology,  but  as  the  natural  and  com¬ 
plete  expression  of  a  liberalism  that  seeks  freedom 
only  to  love,  worship  and  serve. 

In  this  task  I  have  found  the  sense  of  an  alluring 
mission.  I  have  found  inspiration  in  the  discovery 
that  it  lies  nearest  to  the  heart  of  many  fellow  jour¬ 
nalists,  and  that  it  is  the  deepest  longing  of  many 
readers  who  forget  the  imperfections  of  our  work  in 
the  realization  that  we  are  at  least  endeavoring  to 
follow  the  gleam. 


24 


